http://www.friendsofscience.org/

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080520100108AAwBfCD

What about the Oregon Petition with over 32,000 american scientists that have openly admitted they don’t believe in man made global warming. Many of them were climatologists and Phd’s…

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/05/are_32000_scientists_enough_to.html

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

That’s just with one QUICK search that took all of about 4 minutes…

I no longer have access to my post-secondary education database of peer-reviewed materials and just searching on the internet isn’t too acurate with all the contradictory articles… you can find articles by scientists talking about each side, warming and cooling of the sun but only one side is correct so the verdict is still out.

Junk science? No. I just didn’t link to the peer-reviewed articles because I read about them over a year ago. I’m sure you can find some if you have access to any post-secondary instutions databases. Just because I didn’t link to it or write down specific temperature numbers doesn’t mean I’m using junk science.

I didn’t say the sun was warming by much, but there is plenty of peer reviewed articles talking about other planets warming in our solar system due to the sun. BTW, Al Gore isn’t a scientist.

The funniest part of this is that I’ve done research on other topics where I was able to find peer reviewed articles by top ranking scientists that oppose each other. Seriously, you are able to write anything you want and then just use references from articles that support it. There are a million different opinnions so I don’t believe in linking to a peer reviewed article will make my opinnion automatically correct.

There are an increasing number of scientists that agree with me but are unable to say much or they risk losing their funding. Let’s not forget how much more money climatologists that agree with man made global warming get. I’ve actually talked to climatologists that don’t beleive in man made global warming but are unable to discuss it or they risk their jobs.

There were peer reviewed articles by scientists that agreed the planet was flat, and other peer reviewed articles that agreed the planet was round. You can find statistics to back up any side of an argument. I would go get the statistics, but quite frankly, I read them a while ago and don’t wish to go look those stats up again. That and man made global warming wouldn’t make sense since the accumulative amount of CO2 increasese each year and yet the temperatures aren’t much higher than they were several decades ago.

I don’t care if people don’t agree with me or if they do. One side is correct and one side isn’t. Or maybe were both correct, maybe there is warming but it isn’t man made. Or maybe the other side is true. It doesn’t matter for the purposes of this article as this is an investment related article dealing with global warming and the issues it has created (food shortages, rising food prices, etc) and the opportunities it has created. I’m actually quite happy about most of the advancements we are making due to this entire global warming hype. The only party I don’t like is the potential for more taxes (as if governments do a good job of allocating money) and using ethanol from corn (what a waste of energy, farmland and potential food). But you have to like the emission reductions, the advancements in solar and alt. energy and the potential for full electric plug in cars (screw the hybrids, let’s just get to the real deal! though we still need breakthroughs in battery technology!).

Can you tell me how you learned this? Can you refer me to any peer-reviewed articles about this? Really, I’m interested in knowing anyone who has taken the temp. of the sun recently and found it to be HOTTER.

I have to agree that perhaps global warming isn’t all man made, but we do have something to do with it. And if you stopped relying on junk science, you’d agree with me,

Hehe, I really fell off topic on this one…

I didn’t bother mentioning the fact that this year we had colder temperatures, or that the oceans are actually cooling (as per the 3,000 probes we have positioned around the oceans). Nor did I mention many other facts. All this despite the fact that CO2 has increased…

I’d like to know Earl, what part is “beyond logic”? The part where the Sun is the main reason we have heat (and energy) on Earth and perhaps since we’ve just entered a new solar cycle and have more solar activity, it may be the cause of the warming? Or was it the part that CO2 is actually necessary and is NOT a pollutant as defined by any dictionary? Or perhaps it was linking the evidence about how the other planets in our solar system were warming at the same time as us? Or the part where I talked about the glaciers that once covered North America (they aren’t here anymore…) because they melted WITHOUT cars and industrialized humans to blame.

Natural cycles have always occured. The Earth will warm and cool, with or without us. It’s only logical. We even have seasons. Crazy stuff.

As for the “Advice from beyond”, that was a generic tagline that was put up when the logo was being designed and I didn’t even know what I’d be using the website for at that point. Now that I use the site for investing, I have meant to change the tagline for sometime, but have not yet got around to it.

I knew writing this article would upset people. Feel free to comment about the article, whether you agree or disagree, but perhaps elaborate a little more than Earl. What part wasn’t logical? I’d actually argue that it was the idiot who started the “blame the CO2″ as being illogical and all the man-made global warming bandwagon ‘tards are the illogical ones. But hey, at least I can look on the bright side and say that this has been good for the alternative energy industry for raising money and investing in R&D and building manufacturing plants to get alternative energy sources into the mainstream.